MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586823735 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2017.00277

Efficient Fetal-Maternal ECG Signal Separation from Two Channel Maternal Abdominal ECG via Diffusion-Based Channel Selection

2017· article· en· W2586823735 on OpenAlexaff
Ruilin Li, Martin G. Frasch, Hau‐Tieng Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFetusChannel (broadcasting)Computer scienceCardiologyInternal medicinePattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmArtificial intelligencePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a need for affordable, widely deployable maternal-fetal ECG monitors to improve maternal and fetal health during pregnancy and delivery. Based on the diffusion-based channel selection, here we present the mathematical formalism and clinical validation of an algorithm capable of accurate separation of maternal and fetal ECG from a two channel signal acquired over maternal abdomen. The proposed algorithm is the first algorithm, to the best of the authors' knowledge, focusing on the fetal ECG analysis based on two channel maternal abdominal ECG signal, and we apply it to two publicly available databases, the PhysioNet non-invasive fECG database (adfecgdb) and the 2013 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge (CinC2013), to validate the algorithm. The state-of-the-art results are achieved when compared with other available algorithms with a suitable modification. Particularly, the $F_1$ score for the R peak detection achieves $99.3\%$ for the adfecgdb and $87.93\%$ for the CinC2013, and the mean absolute error for the estimated R peak locations is $4.53$ msec for the adfecgdb and $6.21$ msec for the CinC2013.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207